This is the major problem with going with subjective polls over objective computer rankings. Teams in a media metropolis like Los Angeles, California get TONS more exposure and coverage than otherwise fine teams who happen to be in towns like Norman, Oklahoma, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, or Auburn Alabama.
Preaching to the choir here. And yet the BCS, which is in an 'unprecedented state of health" according to conference officials, mind you, still has human polls accounting for 2/3 of the total score.
Are you asking media and USC to think logically and fair? Good luck with that. Took me long time to get over the Co-Champ crap. So when ever USC is referred for 2003, they are THE champions but when ever LSU mentioned, its 'Co-champs'. Thank God we got another :crystal: last year. At least now every one is saying we have won the N'ship TWICE. I can live with that. Geaux tigers.
No, i doesn't "fortify" the argument to get you in. But neither does beating a mediocre Notre Dame team. The only games that "fortify" your argument are those that are against Top 15 teams (you know, the ones that even a national title contender might actually have a chance at losing). By your logic, beating 12 Oregon State caliber teams is tougher than beating 5 Florida/Georgia/Auburn type teams and beating 7 ULM type teams. When sorting out who should be playing for the national championship, who you play outside of the Top 25 doesn't matter at all, whether it be The Citadel or Notre Dame. The only games that show the strength of a team are those against top teams.
You missed my point which admittedly was not very pointed. When you are in a media market like this, there isn't much that doesn't get covered.....like your QB being arrested for sexual assault. The only reason a TV camera was there to cover it was because 1) it IS L.A. and 2) someone within LAPD who had prior knowledge of the impending arrest notified the media. That story made national headlines and Sanchez is still wrongly being accused as a rapist. It's easier to keep things quiet in towns that are NOT L.A. So if two teams end up tied at the end of the year and both have played the same number of top ranked teams, are you saying that OOC teams played should not be considered? I think it DOES matter who you play in entirety. Had LSU played Appy St. last year instead of Va Tech they likely would not have been in the NCG. So when OOC teams are being scheduled some consideration to that program's lilely ranking have to be in the back of the mind. Again the whole point of the article was the biggest snubs. Do you really want to be #1? All that means is the pain was greater.
The oddity about the whole 2003 BCS mess between LSU/USC is they had seven analysts with high and low scores thrown out. That left five scores which were counted, four of which had rankings of LSU 2 USC 3. IF ONLY ONE had switched to USC 2 LSU 3, then the Trojans would have faced OU. The above probably tweaks my dislike for very subjective preseason rankings of all CFB teams. IMO the first rankings should not be polled until after all September games have been completed. No exceptions. :geauxtige :LSU231:
Aren't you contradicting yourself. Comparing W-L record of two teams would include ALL games not limited to only conf games. Am I missing some thing... I think 2003 for USC shouldn't even be on the list. They even got handed over the virtual trophy. Where is the pain? Real pain is for AU.
